Graphene oxide as a sulfur immobilizer in high performance lithium/sulfur cells

ABSTRACT

A battery is described. The battery is composed of a graphene oxide-sulfur (GO—S) nanocomposite cathode, a separator, an anode, and an electrolyte.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a divisional of Ser. No. 15/498,113, which is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/347,600, filed Mar. 26, 2014, which is a US National Stage 371 of PCT International Application No.: PCT/US12/58047, filed Sep. 28, 2012, which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/541,374 filed Sep. 30, 2011, which are incorporated herein by reference as fully set forth in their entirety.

STATEMENT OF GOVERNMENTAL SUPPORT

The invention described and claimed herein was made in part utilizing funds supplied by the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231 between the U.S. Department of Energy and the Regents of the University of California for the management and operation of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The government has certain rights in this invention.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION Field of the Invention

Elemental sulfur (S) is very attractive as a cathode material for high-specific-energy rechargeable lithium batteries, because a battery based on the lithium/sulfur (Li/S) couple would yield a theoretical specific capacity of about 1675 mAh g⁻¹ with a theoretical specific energy of 2600 Wh kg⁻¹ on the assumption of the complete reaction of Li with S to form Li₂S. In addition, S is also inexpensive, abundant and nontoxic. Therefore, S is a promising cathode material for high-energy-density Li/S batteries. Despite these considerable advantages, there are still a number of challenges in Li/S batteries. The first one is the high electrical resistivity of elemental S. The second one is the high solubility (in organic solvent electrolytes) of the polysulfide ions that are formed during the discharge/charge processes. The soluble intermediate Li polysulfides can diffuse through the electrolyte to the Li anode where they are reduced to form solid precipitates (such as Li₂S or Li₂S₂). These reduced products can also diffuse back to the cathode during recharging. These issues can lead to low active materials utilization, low coulombic efficiency, and short cycle life of the S electrode. In order to address these challenges, various carbon and conductive polymer materials have been used to accommodate S and so to overcome its insulating property and reduce the dissolution of Li polysulfides, as reported by Nazar, et al. and others. The most recent work by Archer et al. demonstrated that the mesoporous carbon (C)/S nanocomposites can be cycled for 100 cycles at 974 mAh g⁻¹ at a rate of 0.5 C with the corresponding coulombic efficiency of about 96% and 94%, respectively, at the 1^(st) and 100^(th) cycles. Despite this progress, there are still few reports on fabricating novel C—S cathodes via a chemical reaction-deposition method.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The foregoing aspects and others will be readily appreciated by the skilled artisan from the following description of illustrative embodiments when read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.

FIG. 1A illustrates a scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of a graphene oxide-sulfur (GO—S) nanocomposite after heat treatment in argon (Ar) at 155° C. for 12 hours according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 1B illustrates the structure and properties of graphite oxide (GO) according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 1C illustrates an energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectrum of the GO—S nanocomposite after heat treatment in Ar at 155° C. for 12 hours according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 2A illustrates a transmission electron microscope (TEM) bright field (BF) image.

FIG. 2B illustrates a corresponding elemental mapping for carbon

FIG. 2C illustrates a homogeneous S coating on the GO flakes.

FIG. 2D illustrates an electron energy-loss spectrum (EELS) according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 3A illustrates a representative pattern of GO immobilizing S according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 3B shows the carbon K-edge absorption spectra according to one embodiment.

FIG. 4A illustrates cyclic voltammetry (CV) curve at 0.05 mV s⁻¹ scanning rate.

FIG. 4B illustrates galvanostatic discharge/charge profiles at 0.02 C rate.

FIG. 4C illustrates cycling performance at a constant current rate of 0.1 C after an initial activation processes at 0.02 C for 2 cycles.

FIG. 4D illustrates reversible capacity vs. current density according to an embodiment.

FIG. 5 illustrates a thermo gravimetric analysis (TGA) curve of GO—S nanocomposite recorded in N₂ with a heating rate of 10° C. min⁻¹ before (a) and after (b) heat treatment in Ar environment at 155° C. for 12 hours; (c) Pure GO after heat treatment in Ar environment at 155° C. for 12 hours according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 6A illustrates a SEM image for pure GO according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 6B illustrates another SEM image for pure GO according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 7A illustrates a SEM image of the as-prepared GO—S nanocomposites before heat treatment according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 7B illustrates another SEM image of the as-prepared GO—S nanocomposites before heat treatment according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 7C illustrates a TEM image for GO—S nanocomposites before heat treatment according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 7D illustrates another TEM image for GO—S nanocomposites before heat treatment according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 8 illustrates X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of GO—S nanocomposites before (a) and after heat treatment in Ar environment for 12 h at different temperatures of (b) 155° C., and (c) 160° C. according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 9 illustrates attenuated total reflection Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FTIR) spectra of GO according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 10A illustrates a configuration of two S atoms adsorption on graphene separately according to one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 10B illustrates a configuration of two S atoms adsorption on graphene in pair according to one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 10C illustrates an adsorption configuration according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 10D illustrates another adsorption configuration according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 10E illustrates yet another adsorption configuration according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 10F illustrates yet another adsorption configuration according to an embodiment of the invention

FIG. 10G illustrates yet another adsorption configuration according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 11 illustrates S L-edge soft X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS) spectrum of GO—S nanocomposites after heat treatment in Ar at 155° C. for 12 hours according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 12 illustrates fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) spectra of (a) GO, and (b) GO—S nanocomposites according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 13 illustrates X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) spectra of (a) GO, (b) S element, and (c) GO—S according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 14 illustrates cycling performance of GO—S nanocomposite cathode at a constant rate of 0.05 C after an initial activation processes at 0.02 C for 2 cycles according to an embodiment of the invention

FIG. 15 illustrates a typical discharge/charge profiles (potential vs. capacity) at various C rates for GO—S nanocomposite cathode according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 16 illustrates a cycling performance of GO—S nanocomposite cathode at a constant rate of 0.1 C after an initial activation processes at 0.02 C for 2 cycles according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 17A illustrates a SEM image of the as-synthesized GO—S nanocomposites after heat treatment in Ar at 160° C. for 12 hours according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 17B illustrates another SEM image of the as-synthesized GO—S nanocomposites after heat treatment in Ar at 160° C. for 12 hours according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 17C illustrates a TEM image of the as-synthesized GO—S nanocomposites after heat treatment in Ar at 160° C. for 12 hours according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 17D illustrates another TEM image of the as-synthesized GO—S nanocomposites after heat treatment in Ar at 160° C. for 12 hours according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 18A illustrates a CV curve of a GO—S nanocomposite cathode at 0.05 mV s⁻¹ scanning rate according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 18B illustrates galvanostatic charge/discharge profiles of GO—S nanocomposite cathode at 0.02 C rate according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 18C illustrates cycling performance of GO—S nanocomposite cathode at a constant current rate of 0.1 C after an initial activation processes at 0.02 C for 2 cycles according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 18D illustrates reversible capacity vs. current density (rate capability) for GO—S nanocomposite cathode. All the cells were cycled in the potential window from 1.0 to 3.0 V according to an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 19 illustrates cycling performance of a pure GO cathode at a constant rate of 0.1 C after an initial activation processes at 0.02 C for 2 cycles according to an embodiment of the invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

In the discussions that follow, various process steps may or may not be described using certain types of manufacturing equipment, along with certain process parameters. It is to be appreciated that other types of equipment can be used, with different process parameters employed, and that some of the steps may be performed in other manufacturing equipment without departing from the scope of this invention. Furthermore, different process parameters or manufacturing equipment could be substituted for those described herein without departing from the scope of the invention.

These and other details and advantages of the present invention will become more fully apparent from the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.

Various embodiments of the invention describe a low cost and environmentally benign chemical reaction-deposition method to immobilize sulfur (S) on quasi-2-dimensional graphene oxides (GO) to prepare graphene oxide-sulfur (GO—S) nanocomposite cathodes for Li/S cells in ionic liquid-based electrolytes. FIG. 1a shows a scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of a GO—S nanocomposite. FIG. 1b illustrates the structure and properties of graphene oxide (GO) which may depend on a particular synthesis method and degree of oxidation. The illustrated GO structure comprises functional groups including a) epoxy bridges, b) hydroxyl groups, and c) pairwise carboxyl groups. GO typically preserves the layer structure of the parent graphite, but the layers are buckled and the interlayer spacing is about two times larger (˜0.7 nm) than that of graphite. Strictly speaking “oxide” is an incorrect but historically established name. Besides oxygen epoxide groups (bridging oxygen atoms), other functional groups experimentally found are: carbonyl (═CO), hydroxyl (—OH), and phenol groups attached to both sides. There is evidence of “buckling” (deviation from planarity), folding and cracking of graphene oxide sheets upon deposition of the layers on a choice of substrate.

In one embodiment, nano-S was deposited onto graphene oxide (GO) sheets by a chemical reaction-deposition method (see below experimental details section for further details). Then, the as-synthesized samples were heat treated in an argon (Ar) environment at low temperature (155° C.) for 12 hours in order to remove some of the bulk S which is not directly attached to the GO layers. When the as-synthesized GO—S nanocomposites were heat-treated in Ar, the bulk S on the external surface of the GO melted and diffused into the pores of the GO due to the strong adsorption effects derived from both the high surface area and the functional groups on the surface of the GO. At the same time, this low-temperature heat treatment process can partially remove and/or chemically modify some of the functional groups on the GO surface and improve the electronic conductivity of the as-prepared GO—S nanocomposites (See Table 1 below, wherein these materials were heat treated in Ar environment at 155° C. for 12 hour).

TABLE 1 Conductivities of the prepared materials. Heat treated GO-S Sample name GO Heat treated GO nanocomposites Conductivity (S cm⁻¹) 0.00129 0.316 0.105

FIG. 1a shows the SEM image of the as-prepared GO—S nanocomposite after heat treatment. The layer-like extremely conjugated nanostructures with a highly developed porous structure are clearly illustrated. The energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) microanalysis in FIG. 1c confirms the existence of S in the composites. As indicated in a thermo gravimetric analysis (TGA), about 66 wt % S is incorporated into the GO after heat treatment. FIG. 5 illustrates a TGA curve of GO—S nanocomposite recorded in N₂ with a heating rate of 10° C. min⁻¹ before (a) and after (b) heat treatment in Ar environment at 155° C. for 12 hours; (c) Pure GO after heat treatment in Ar environment at 155° C. for 12 hours. From the TGA result (c), it is clear that the mass loss due to the loss of functional groups from the pure GO after heat treatment in Ar environment at 155° C. for 12 hours is very small (˜3%). The mass loss due to the loss of functional groups from GO—S upon heating GO—S nanocomposites should be even smaller. Therefore, we are able to calculate the S content of the GO—S nanocomposite using the TGA data according to an embodiment of the invention.

The transmission electron microscope (TEM) image in FIG. 2a and the electron energy-loss spectrum (EELS) in FIG. 2d indicate that a thin layer of S with a thickness of tens of nanometers is homogenously dispersed on the flake-like GO surface with no significant fraction of bulk S exposed on the external surface of the sample after heat treatment (For comparison, see the FIG. 6a,b SEM images for pure GO and FIG. 7a,b SEM images and FIG. 7c,d TEM images for GO—S nanocomposites before heat treatment). The corresponding elemental mapping of carbon (FIG. 2b ), and S (FIG. 2c ) display a very similar intensity distribution, revealing a homogeneous S coating on the GO flakes in the as-formed GO—S nanocomposites.

The unique structure of the GO—S nanocomposite can improve the overall electrochemical performance when it is used as a cathode material for Li/S batteries. Firstly, it can accommodate the significant volume changes of the S as it is converted to Li₂S on discharge, and back to elemental S on recharge. In addition, the partially reduced GO with its large surface area along with ubiquitous cavities can establish more intimate electronic contact with the S and avoid their aggregation and loss of electrical contact with the current collector. Secondly, the low-temperature heat-treated GO still contains various types of functional groups. FIG. 9 illustrates ATR-FTIR spectra of GO. The bands at 1103 cm⁻¹, 1226 cm⁻¹, and 1751 cm⁻¹ can be assigned to C—O stretching vibrations, C—OH stretching vibrations, and C═O stretching vibrations from carbonyl/carboxylic groups, respectively. The GO was heat treated in Ar at 155° C. for 12 hours. These functional groups can have strong adsorbing ability to anchor S atoms and to effectively prevent the subsequently formed Li polysulfides from dissolving in the electrolyte during cycling.

Calculations were performed, ab initio, to clarify the role of functional groups on GO in immobilizing S (see the calculation methods and detailed results section below). The results indicated that both epoxy and hydroxyl groups can enhance the binding of S to the C—C bonds due to the induced ripples by the functional groups (see FIG. 3a ). We also performed a soft X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS) measurement which probes unoccupied electronic structure and thus is a powerful tool for probing chemical bonding in surface chemistry. FIG. 3b shows the carbon K-edge absorption spectra for both GO and GO—S nanocomposites (see also S L-edge spectrum in FIG. 11). The absorption features “A”, “D” and “E”, which can be attributed to the π* state, excitonic state, and σ* state, respectively, are observed for both samples. Of note in the spectra is the increase in the sharpness of the π* and excitonic state for GO—S nanocomposites as compared with GO, suggesting that the ordering of the sp²-hybridized carbon structure is better formatted after S is incorporated. In addition, feature “C” originating from different functional groups (possibly C—O bond) on the GO are weakened significantly when incorporated with S, which means a strong chemical interaction between S and functional groups of GO happens and S can partially reduce the GO. In addition, a new feature “B” originated from the C—S σ* excitations, is observed for the GO—S nanocomposites.

We evaluated the electrochemical Li storage capability of these heat-treated GO—S nanocomposites as potential cathode materials for Li/S cells in the n-methyl-(n-butyl) pyrrolidinium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide (PYR₁₄TFSI), Li bis(trifluoromethylsulfonyl)imide (LiTFSI), and poly(ethylene glycol) dimethyl ether (PEGDME, M_(w)=250) mixture-based electrolyte.

FIG. 4 (a) shows the cyclic voltammetry (CV) profile of one electrode. The measurement was conducted at a scan rate of 0.05 mVs⁻¹ in the voltage range of 1.0 to 3.6V vs Li/Li⁺. During the first cathodic scan, three main reduction peaks at around 2.4, 2.1, and 1.8 V were clearly shown. According to the reported mechanisms for oxidation and reduction of S during discharge/charge, the peak at around 2.4V can be assigned to the reduction of elemental S to higher-order Li polysulfides (Li₂S_(n), n≥8). The peak at about 2.1V probably corresponds to the reduction of higher-order Li polysulfides to lower-order Li polysulfides (such as Li₂S₆, Li₂S₄) from Li₂S₈. The peak at 1.8V is related to the reduction of polysulfide species to form Li₂S.

In the subsequent anodic scan, only one sharp oxidation peak is observed at about 2.6V that is attributed to the complete conversion of Li₂S and polysulfides into elemental S. The main reduction peak is shifted to slightly higher potential and the oxidation peaks to lower potentials with increase in cycle number, indicating an improvement of reversibility of the cell with cycling. In addition, as the cycle number increased, the oxidation peak at 2.6V becomes less significant, while another new one at 2.35 V grows higher in intensity. The oxidation peak at 2.35V is associated with the formation of Li₂S_(n) (n>2). After the second cycle, both the CV peak positions and peak currents undergo very small changes, indicating relatively good capacity retention. The CV results show that GO can help to prevent S from dissolving into the electrolyte because of its large surface along with some functional groups on the surface.

FIG. 4 (b) depicts the first and second cycle discharge/charge typical voltage profiles of the electrodes at the 0.02 C rate (1 C=1675 mA g⁻¹) between 1.0 and 3.0V (The capacity values in this description are calculated according to the mass of S). All the discharge curves show three plateaus in the voltage profile that are consistent with the peaks in the CV and are also well documented in the literature. The GO—S nanocomposite delivers a high initial discharge capacity of about 1320 mAh g⁻¹ at 0.02 C. The corresponding coulombic efficiency in the first discharge/charge cycle is 96.4%. At the second cycle, a large reversible capacity of about 1247 mAh g⁻¹ is preserved (97.5% coulombic efficiency), corresponding to about 94.5% capacity retention. This initial capacity loss is small compared to the formerly reported results of similar materials.

FIG. 4 (c) shows the cycling performance of the same cell cycled at a rate of 0.1 C after the initial 2 cycles at 0.02 C. The discharge capacity of the first cycle at 0.1 C remains at around 1000 mAh g⁻¹. At the second cycle at 0.1 C, this value decreases to about 950 mAh g⁻¹. However, after more than 50 cycles at the same rate, the reversible capacity remains at 954 mAh g⁻¹ (with a coulombic efficiency of about 96.7%), indicating very stable reversibility of the electrochemical reactions and excellent capacity retention. The cycle performance of another coin cell is further illustrated in FIG. 14. The cycling performance of GO—S nanocomposite cathode at a constant rate of 0.05 C after an initial activation processes at 0.02 C for 2 cycles. The GO—S nanocomposite was heat treated in Ar at 155° C. for 12 hours. The S content of the GO—S nanocomposite was 66 wt %, and the S content of the cathode (including carbon black and binder) was 46.2 wt %. In sum, the GO—S nanocomposites display improved coulombic efficiencies compared to former reports.

The discharge capacity of the GO—S was highly reproducible over many coin cells. Another example of the electrochemical performance of the GO—S electrode is demonstrated in FIG. 4 (d) where a cell showed a reversible capacity of 735 mAh g⁻¹ at 0.5 C after 40 cycles at various rates. Further cycling at a low rate of 0.05 C brings it back to a reversible capacity of about 1100 mAh g⁻¹ for another 20 cycles. When this coin cell was discharged at a higher rate of 1 C, a reversible capacity of about 550 mAh g⁻¹ was obtained. The last decrease of the rate to 0.2 C, yielded a reversible capacity of about 890 mAh g⁻¹. When this coin cell was further discharged at 2 C, an acceptable reversible capacity of about 370 mAh g⁻¹ was obtained, indicating excellent capacity reversibility and high rate performance even after 100 cycles.

FIG. 15 illustrates a typical discharge/charge profiles (potential vs. capacity) at various C rates for GO—S nanocomposite cathode. The GO—S nanocomposites were heat treated in Ar at 155° C. for 12 hours. The S content of the GO—S nanocomposite was 66 wt %, and the S content of the cathode (including carbon black and binder) was 46.2 wt %.

The GO clearly performs very well as a means to stabilize the S electrode. The GO provides highly reactive functional groups on its surface that can serve as immobilizers to hold the S. Also by limiting the concentration of the polysulfide anions in the electrolyte, the redox shuttle phenomenon is largely avoided. The intimate contact of the S provided by the large surface area and the functional groups on GO is favorable to good electron/ion accessibility, leading to enhanced cycle performance and rate capability. In addition, the optimized ionic liquid-based electrolytes which have suitable viscosities and wetting properties influence the penetration of electrolyte into the S electrode structure, while increasing the ionic conductivity within the electrodes at the same time.

A control experiment in LiTFSI-PEGDME-based electrolyte is described in relation to FIG. 16 which illustrates a cycling performance of GO—S nanocomposite cathode at a constant rate of 0.1 C after an initial activation processes at 0.02 C for 2 cycles. The GO—S nanocomposites were heat treated in Ar at 155° C. for 12 hours.

From FIG. 16, we can see that the GO—S nanocomposite cathode has a very high initial reversible capacity of about 1304 mAh g⁻¹ at 0.02 C with the corresponding coulombic efficiency of about 94.7% in the LiTFSI-PEGDME electrolyte. After two cycles' activation at 0.02 C, a large discharge capacity of about 1014 mAh g⁻¹ still can be delivered at the first cycle at 0.1 C with a corresponding coulombic efficiency of about 100%. However, after 16 cycles at 0.1 C, the capacity is about 736 mAh g⁻¹, and the corresponding coulombic efficiency is only about 69.7%.

This control experiment shows that the use of the ionic liquid-based electrolyte (PYR₁₄TFSI-LiTFSI-PEGDME mixture, as shown in the main text of the paper) can definitely help the improvement of the electrochemical performance of GO—S based Li/S cells. On the other hand, the previous research results indicated that when using PYR₁₄TFSI-LiTFSI-PEGDME mixture as electrolyte in the Li/S cells with other C—S nanocomposite (not GO—S) cathodes, the capacity fading is clear. These results directly support our conclusion that the GO clearly performs very well as a means to stabilize the S in our GO—S electrode, while using ionic-liquid based electrolyte can further enhance the performance.

In summary, a novel chemical reaction-deposition method is employed to synthesize a GO—S nanocomposite to immobilize S in the cathode material of Li/S cells. The GO—S nanocomposite cathodes display good reversibility, excellent capacity stability of about 1000 mAh g⁻¹, and rate capability of up to 2 C in ionic liquid-based electrolyte. The GO in the heat-treated composites have good conductivity, extremely high surface-area, and provide a robust electron transport network. The functional groups on the GO surface play the role of immobilizers that keep intimate contact of the conducting matrix with S species, and effectively confine any polysulfides from dissolving. The GO network also accommodates the volume change of the electrode during the Li—S electrochemical reaction. As a result, reversibility and high rate discharge capability were obtained. The same strategy could be helpful to explore and develop new porous carbon, or conductive polymer based S nanocomposite cathodes for advanced Li/S cells.

Experimental Details Chemicals.

Graphite powder, sodium nitrate (NaNO₃), potassium permanganate (KMnO₄), 96% sulfuric acid (H₂SO₄) solution, 30% hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) solution, sodium sulfide (Na₂S, anhydrous, Alfa Aesar), sublimed S powder (99.9%, Mallinckrodt), formic acid (HCOOH, 88%, Aldrich), N-methy-N-butylpyrrolidinium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl) imide (PYR₁₄TFSI, ≥98.0%, Aldrich), poly(ethylene glycol) dimethy ether (PEGDME, M_(w)=250, Aldrich) and lithium bis(trifluoromethylsulfonyl)imide (LiTFSI, 99.95%, Aldrich) were used without further treatment.

Synthesis of the Graphene Oxides.

The graphene oxide used in an embodiment of the invention is exfoliated from graphite oxide prepared using the following method. Graphite oxide was prepared using a modified Hummers method. Firstly, 0.2 g of natural graphite powder and 0.175 g of NaNO₃ were placed in a three-necked flask with a stirrer chip. Then 15 ml of 98% H₂SO₄ was slowly added. The mixture was stirred in an ice water bath environment for about 2 hours followed by gradually adding 0.9 grams of KMnO₄ (purity 99%) over about 2 hours under slow stirring conditions. The as-formed mixture was allowed to react for five days at room temperature. Afterwards, 20 ml of 5 wt % H₂SO₄ aqueous solution was added over the course of about 1 h with stirring. The resultant mixture was further stirred for 2 h followed by adding 0.6 ml of 30 wt % H₂O₂ aqueous solution and stirred for another 2 h. This solution was continuously washed thoroughly with a mixed aqueous solution of 3 wt % H₂SO₄/0.5 wt % H₂O₂ many times, and then the purification procedure was similarly repeated three more times using deionized (DI) water (Millipore, 18.2 MΩcm). The resultant mixture was dispersed in DI water and then centrifuged to remove ions of oxidant origins. The remaining dispersion was purified by repeating the same procedures 20 times with DI water. Finally, a brown-black homogeneous graphite oxide dispersion was obtained. In this embodiment, 180 mg of graphite oxide was suspended in 180 ml ultrapure water (Millipore, 18.2 MΩcm), and then sonicated at 50° C. for 5 hours to form a stable graphene oxide (GO) dispersion.

Preparation of Sodium Polysulfide Solution.

0.58 g Na₂S was added into a flask that has been filled with 25 ml distilled water to form a Na₂S solution, then 0.72 g elemental S was suspended in the Na₂S solution and stirred with a magnetic stirrer for about 2 hours at room temperature. The color of the solution changed slowly to orange-yellow as the sulfur dissolved. After dissolution of the sulfur, a sodium polysulfide (Na₂S_(x)) solution was obtained (It should be noted that through controlling the ratios of Na₂S and elemental S, we adjust the value of x in Na₂S_(x), this will further control the S content in the as following prepared GO—S composites).

Na₂S+(x−1)S→Na₂S_(x)

Synthesis of Graphene Oxide-Sulfur Composite.

The novel graphene oxide-sulfur (GO—S) composite was prepared by a chemical deposition method in an aqueous solution. 180 mg of graphite oxide was suspended in 180 ml ultrapure water (Millipore, 18.2 MΩcm), and then sonicated at 50° C. for 5 hours to form a stable graphene oxide (GO) dispersion. Then, the Na₂S_(x) solution was added to the above-prepared GO dispersions in the presence of 5 wt % surfactant cetyl trimethylammonium bromide (CTAB), the as-prepared GO/Na₂S_(x) blended solution was sonicated for another 2 hours and then directly titrated into 100 ml of 2 mol/L HCOOH solution at a rate of 30-40 drops/min and stirred for 2 hours. Finally, the precipitate was filtered and washed with acetone and distilled water several times to eliminate salts and impurities. After filtration, the precipitate was dried at 50° C. in a drying oven for 48 hours.

S_(x) ²⁻+2H⁺→(x−1)S+H₂S

Heat treatment of GO—S composites. The as-synthesized GO—S composites were heat treated in a sealed vessel under flowing argon with controlled flow rate of about 200 cc S⁻¹ at 155° C. for 12 h. In order to further decrease the S content, some of the as-synthesized samples were also heat treated in the same argon environment at 160° C. for 12 h.

Cell Assembly and Testing.

CR2032-type coin cells were fabricated by sandwiching a porous polypropylene separator (Celgard 3501, Hoechst Celanese) between the heat treated GO—S nanocomposite electrode and a lithium metal foil (Cyprus Foote Mineral, 99.98%, USA) in a high-purity argon-filled glove box. 1 mol/kg LiTFSI in PYR₁₄TFSI/PEGDME (1:1, by weight) solution was used as the electrolyte. The GO—S working electrodes were prepared by mixing the GO—S nanocomposite, carbon black, and polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF) at a weight ratio of 70:20:10 in NMP solvent to form a slurry. The resultant slurry was uniformly spread via doctor blade on pure aluminum foil and dried at 50° C. for 72 hours. The final S content of the cathode material is 46.2 w/o. Cyclic voltammogram (CV) measurements were performed on an AQ4 Gamry Reference 600 electrochemical workstation with a voltage range from 1.0 to 3.6 V at a scan rate of 0.05 mV s⁻¹. Galvanostatic discharge and charge experiments of the coin cells were conducted using an Arbin automatic battery cycler (BT-2000) at several different rates between cut-off potentials of 1.0 and 3.0 V. All of the electrochemical performance measurements were obtained at a constant temperature of 25° C.

Material Characterizations.

The samples were characterized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM: Zeiss Gemini Ultra-55) coupled with an energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer (EDX), transition electron microscope (TEM: 200 kV FEI monochromated F20 UT Tecnai), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), X-ray diffraction (XRD) (Diffraktometer D500/501, Siemens), Hall effect measurement system (HMS-5000), Attenuated total reflection Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FTIR) (Nicolet Avatar 360 with an Omni-Sampler ATR accessory), and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) (Surface Science Instruments S-probe spectrometer). The soft X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS) measurements were performed on Beamline 7.0.1 at the Advanced Light Source of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The energy resolution of monochromator was set to 0.1 eV for the C K-edge and S L-edge XAS.

Computational Methods.

All the calculations were performed by using Vienna ab-initio simulation package (VASP). The Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof (PBE) generalized gradient approximation and the projector-augmented wave (PAW) potential with a cutoff energy of 400 eV were used to describe the exchange-correlation energy and the electron-ion interaction, respectively. We adopted a 5×5 supercell geometry for graphene and the distance between two adjacent carbon sheets is at least 10 Å. A k-mesh of 6×6×1 was used to sample the Brillouin zone. All the geometries were optimized without any symmetry constraint until the residual force on each atom is less than 0.01 eV/Å. Herein, two-sided configurations are considered for adsorption on GO. The binding energy of a pair of Sulfur atoms is defined as the energy difference between the reactants (graphene/GO and two S atoms) and products (the S-adsorbed complex), that is BE=E_(G/GO)+2E_(S)−E_(G/GO-2S). Detailed calculated results are shown in FIG. 10.

FIG. 8 illustrates XRD patterns of GO—S nanocomposites before (a) and after heat treatment in Ar environment for 12 h at different temperatures of (b) 155° C., and (c) 160° C. The crystallized S nanoparticles were observed under the high-resolution TEM (HRTEM) imaging mode, as shown below in FIG. 17d . However, we cannot exclude the possibility that there are some larger S crystallites in the thicker region of the samples (residues of those seen in FIG. 7 before heat treatment) that could also contribute to the XRD patterns.

FIG. 10 illustrates calculated results (yellow, red and white balls denote S, O and H atoms, respectively, while the others, blue, are carbon atoms): First, we calculate two S atoms adsorption on graphene separately FIG. 10(a) and in pair FIG. 10(b). The binding energies are 1.64 and 2.08 eV, respectively, which can be viewed as the lower and higher bounds of S adsorption. Then we study the effect of adsorbed epoxy groups on the adsorption of two S atoms. It is found that S adsorption can be significantly enhanced by epoxy groups, depending on the distance between the functional group and S atom. Typically, the binding energies are 1.82 eV and 2.03 eV for the adsorption configurations shown in FIG. 10(c) and FIG. 10(d). Note that the locations of S atoms are the same as that in FIG. 10(a), where the binding energy is 1.64 eV. The enhancement effect of the epoxy decreases with increasing distance between S and the epoxy group. Additional calculations show that the hydroxyl group exhibits a similar trend. FIG. 10(e) and FIG. 10(f) give the binding energy of 1.66 and 2.84 eV, indicating that the effect of hydroxyl group is more local than that of the epoxy. A surprising result is that S atoms can also insert into the O—H bond (g), with a much larger binding energy of 4.05 eV. However, the dynamic factor may hinder its formation.

FIG. 11 illustrates S L-edge XAS spectrum of GO—S nanocomposites after heat treatment in Ar at 155° C. for 12 hours. It confirms the existence of S in the composites. The soft X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS) measurements were performed on Beamline 7.0.1 at the Advanced Light Source. The energy resolution of monochromator was set to 0.1 eV for the S L-edge XAS.

FIG. 12 illustrates FTIR spectra of (a) GO, and (b) GO—S nanocomposites. These materials were heat treated in Ar at 155° C. for 12 hours. According to the literature reports, the 1220 cm⁻¹ indicates the C—OH stretching vibrations, the ˜1200 cm⁻¹ can be assigned to C—O stretch, while the characteristic feature at ˜1204.5 cm⁻¹ in GO—S nanocomposites (while it is absent in GO) may indicate the existence of C—S bond in the as-synthesized GO—S nanocomposites after thermal treatment.

FIG. 13 illustrates XPS spectra of (a) GO, (b) S element, and (c) GO—S. The GO and GO—S were heat treated in Ar at 155° C. for 12 hours. In the S 2p_(3/2) region, XPS of GO—S nanocomposites show one peak at S 2p_(3/2) binding energy of about 164.0 eV with a slight wider full widths at half maximum intensities (FWHM) than that of elemental S. In the S is region, XPS of GO—S nanocomposites show one peak at S1s binding energy of about 228.0 eV with a slight wider full widths at half maximum intensities (FWHM) than that of elemental S. These chemical shifts of S2p_(3/2) and S1s regions may indicate that there have interactions between S and GO in the GO—S nanocomposites.

FIG. 17 illustrates SEM (a, b) and TEM (c, d) images of the as-synthesized GO—S nanocomposites after heat treatment in Ar at 160° C. for 12 hours. In the high-resolution TEM (HRTEM) image (d), some crystallized S nanoparticles are highlighted by arrows.

FIG. 18 illustrates an electrochemical evaluation of GO—S nanocomposite cathodes made by a different process from that in the description above. The GO—S nanocomposites were heat treated in Ar at 160° C. for 12 hours. The S content in the GO—S nanocomposite was about 40 wt %, and the S content in the cathode (including carbon black and binder) was about 28 wt %. (a) CV curve of a GO—S nanocomposite cathode at 0.05 mV s⁻¹ scanning rate; (b) Galvanostatic charge/discharge profiles of GO—S nanocomposite cathode at 0.02 C rate; (c) cycling performance of GO—S nanocomposite cathode at a constant current rate of 0.1 C after an initial activation processes at 0.02 C for 2 cycles; (d) Reversible capacity vs. current density (rate capability) for GO—S nanocomposite cathode. All the cells were cycled in the potential window from 1.0 to 3.0 V.

Note that the capacity values are normalized to the initial discharge capacity. Also note that the first discharge capacity curve is in abnormal shape (b). We can also see an extra reduction current at lower voltage region in the first cycle of the CV curve (a). These features may come from some irreversible electrochemical reactions related to the GO, because this abnormal initial discharge is only significant in samples with lower S loading (i.e. higher GO content; we did not observe such abnormal behavior in the samples prepared using the process described above-FIGS. 4, 14, and 15). Nevertheless, these results show that GO—S(even though it is processed differently) can help to improve the capacity retention, coulombic efficiency, and rate capacity of the Li/S cells.

FIG. 19 illustrates cycling performance of a pure GO cathode at a constant rate of 0.1 C after an initial activation processes at 0.02 C for 2 cycles. The GO was heat treated in Ar at 155° C. for 12 hours before assembling coin cell. The result indicates that the GO phase contributes essentially nothing to the capacity, because at the potentials of the S electrode, GO does not intercalate lithium at all. 

What is claimed is:
 1. A battery comprising: a graphene oxide-sulfur (GO—S) nanocomposite cathode; a separator; an anode; and an electrolyte.
 2. The battery of claim 1, wherein the separator is a porous polypropylene.
 3. The battery of claim 2, wherein the porous polypropylene is a Celgard
 3501. 4. The battery of claim 1, wherein the electrolyte is an ionic liquid-based electrolyte.
 5. The battery of claim 4, wherein the electrolyte is PYR₁₄TFSI-LiTFSI-PEGDME.
 6. The battery of claim 1, wherein the electrolyte is LiTFSI-PEGDME.
 7. The battery of claim 1, wherein the graphene oxide-sulfur (GO—S) nanocomposite cathode further comprises carbon black, and polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF).
 8. The battery of claim 1, wherein the graphene oxide-sulfur (GO—S) nanocomposite cathode comprises GO—S nanocomposite, carbon black, and polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF) at a weight ratio of 70:20:10, respectively.
 9. The battery of claim 1, wherein the cathode further comprises an aluminum substrate.
 10. The battery of claim 1, wherein the GO—S nanocomposite further comprises a plurality of functional groups and S is bonded to carbon atoms.
 11. The battery of claim 10, wherein the plurality of functional groups includes at least one functional group selected from the group consisting of an epoxy bridge, a hydroxyl group, a phenol group, and a carbonyl group. 